Global warming, climate change, all these things are just a dream come true for politicians. I deal with evidence and not with frightening computer models because the seeker after truth does not put his faith in any consensus. The road to the truth is long and hard, but this is the road we must follow. People who describe the unprecedented comfort and ease of modern life as a climate disaster, in my opinion have no idea what a real problem is.
Marie-Eve Volkoff, 85, is suing the government alongside the association with a membership of around 2,000 other elderly women for what she calls “climate lockdown.”
We’ve been told that climate change affects those in poorer neighborhoods (even though they might be butt up against a wealthy one). Okay, and now women are more greatly impacted … but not men? How selective can climate change be? Can floods, wildfires, tornados, etc. randomly wipe out a town (as they have through the ages naturally) but only raise the alarm if they hit the wrong segment of the population? You can imagine the headline:
“Climate change kills everyone in village: Women impacted the most”.
And what about the “hes” who become “shes” or vice versa? This is getting way too complicated. Or ludicrous?
The women had protested their government’s “woefully inadequate” efforts to fight climate change. They said older women were at particular risk of dying during heat waves and demanded a ruling that would slash fossil fuel emissions much faster than planned.
And a court of supposedly intelligent men and women bought it — hook, line, and sinker.
…, judges found that the Swiss government had violated some human rights by missing past emissions reduction targets.
Now, elderly women in Switzerland are to be somehow protected from the evils of alleged manmade climate change, whatever that means. But even more significant than that, it is the first time the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has addressed climate change emissions.
But what were the actions that brought about this charge?
“…The Swiss government had violated some human rights by missing past emissions reduction targets. And: included “a failure by the Swiss authorities to quantify, through a carbon budget or otherwise, national greenhouse gas emissions limitations.”
Tuesday’s ruling is the first time the ECHR has issued a ruling on emissions and climate change. (emphasis mine)
As the leading coral reef expert Dr Peter Ridd has explained, “bleaching” is merely part of a natural process, when coral expels algae in order to switch to a different type which is more suitable adapted to new conditions.
For a start, there has been no “devastating toll”, as the BBC pretends, from the possibility that the world is slightly warmer than a few years ago. (Given margins of error, there is no certainty about this.)
But more importantly, Rannard grossly misrepresents the science. Coral does not “turn white” because the water is too hot. Nor is this is a rare occurrence, as the “fourth global mass coral bleaching event” implies.
On the contrary, bleaching is a common event, which can take place for all sorts of reasons, including when the water gets too cold.
As the leading coral reef expert Dr Peter Ridd has explained, “bleaching” is merely part of a natural process, when coral expels algae in order to switch to a different type which is more suitable adapted to new conditions.
According to Ridd, coral cover on the Great Barrier Reef last year reached record levels, despite four supposedly catastrophic bleaching events in the six years prior to 2022. Neither has there been any significant change in corals worldwide.
Rannard’s article has nothing to do with science; it is just more scaremongering propaganda.
This interview with Peter Ridd which followed his annual review on corals last year is worth watching:
The energy-poor nation of Ethiopia has just become the first in the world to ban the import of all non-electric automobiles. This despite the fact that barely half of Ethiopian citizens have any access to electricity. Other sources say that number may be as low as 30 percent.
The energy-poor nation of Ethiopia has just become the first in the world to ban the import of all non-electric automobiles. This despite the fact that barely half of Ethiopian citizens have any access to electricity. Other sources say that number may be as low as 30 percent.
On the other hand, electricity in Ethiopia is cheap – just six-tenths of a cent per kilowatt-hour for households and 2.1 cents/kWh for businesses, compared with 15.6 cents and 15.2 cents, respectively, worldwide. Electricity is cheaper than gasoline (about $2 per liter).
Cheap, that is, until the reality that Ethiopia’s gross domestic product per capita is a paltry $1,130, compared with the world average of $13,920 and the U.S. average of $81,614. Moreover, only 2 percent of Ethiopia’s 130 million people (about 600,000) even own a motor vehicle – about the same number of Americans (and the same percentage) in 1910.
While tariffs as high as 220 percent of purchase price still apply to gasoline and diesel vehicles, mostly imported from oil-rich Gulf States, in 2022, Ethiopia’s Ministry of Finance exempted all EVs from value-added taxes, surtaxes, and excise taxes. The Ministry of Transport and Logistics announced a 10-year plan to support the import of at least 4,800 electric buses and 148,000 electric automobiles as part of its push toward EV-only motor transport.
With Ethiopia’s per capita income projected to double by 2028, the nation also exempted completely knocked-down kits from customs duty taxes in a move to encourage local EV assembly and component manufacturing sectors. While fully built EVs will have a customs duty of 15 percent (a major reduction), the duty for semi-knocked-down kits is now just 5 percent.
And wouldn’t you know it? Clean Technica reports that the primary beneficiaries of these changes are Chinese automakers! Made-in-China new and low-mileage used vehicles are “selling quite well” in Addis Ababa, though there are also Toyotas and other models.
Who, though, is buying and driving these low-cost (but not by Ethiopian standards) Chinese EVs? Not very many Ethiopians, for whom even a $25,000 EV costs 20 times the GDP per capita. The much more likely suspects are the 30,000 Chinese who run much of the nation. Curiously, there are almost no public charging stations, suggesting that EV owners charge their vehicles in private, secure garages.
Most Americans are likely unaware that Ethiopia is a central hub for China’s Belt and Road Initiative or that there are at least 400 Chinese construction and manufacturing projects in Ethiopia valued collectively at over $4 billion. The Chinese are also financing and building the bulk of Ethiopia’s air, road, and rail infrastructure; they also built four photovoltaic solar arrays.
As China has become Ethiopia’s chief trading partner, it is also the holder of nearly $14 billion in Ethiopian debt. Only Angola is more indebted to Chinese bankers than Ethiopia. Political ties between the two countries have been growing since Ethiopia hosted a Forum on China-Africa Cooperation back in 2003. And in 2012, China funded and built the $200 million African Union headquarters in Addis Ababa.
Wilson Fellow Maria Repnikova, back in 2021, warned that China was as much an exploiter of the Ethiopian people as it was a “savior” of the nation from abject poverty. Despite ongoing civil strife, the Chinese have taken a hands-off approach to the internal conflicts, in marked contrast to U.S. policy of withdrawing trade benefits and condemning “gross violations of … human rights.”
There are signs that, despite very favorable press and cozy relationships with Ethiopian politicians (on the take?), there is growing resentment among the general populace that Chinese companies bring their own labor and materials, illegally work in sectors where Ethiopians are unable to get employment, and only hire Ethiopians for the lowest-paying jobs.
Europeans have been waking up to the reality that China has been plotting to rule the automotive world through its dominance in EV manufacturing (which stems from its control of lithium and other EV battery materials, just for starters). At last September’s IAA Mobility Conference in Munich, 40 percent of the presenters were from Asia, including 75 Chinese exhibitors.
Investment banker Christian Kames said that the increase in Chinese companies at the event showed that those firms “really have the European market … as the next market they want to conquer.”
Chinese automaker BYD, which has backing from Warren Buffet, launched its Seal EV sedan for Europe at the event, and several other Chinese firms announced their intentions to expand their European sales. Meanwhile, two major European automakers were downgraded because of the threat posed by Chinese EVs.
In the U.S., the threat posed by Chinese EVs has reached the political realm, as Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown, who is facing a tough reelection fight this fall, called on President Biden to ban the import of Chinese electric vehicles into the United States. Brown called them an “existential threat” to the U.S. automotive industry just days after voting for the first time with Republicans to nullify Biden’s latest move to force EVs on the American people.
The Chinese have been subsidizing their automakers and other green technology companies (how shocking! Surely no American or European green tech company ever got a taxpayer dime!), prompting the EU to launch an investigation and threaten retroactive tariffs. [President Trump likewise has called for high tariffs as a check on Chinese auto dominance.]
Brown, now rivaling John Fetterman for the most recalcitrant Democrat in the Senate, echoed GOP Senator Joshua Hawley in stating that “a surge in Chinese EV sales would cripple the domestic manufacturing base, including critical inputs from parts suppliers to steel, tires, and glass producers,” and also “undermine efforts to restore semiconductor production.”
Another Sherrod-come-lately concern is the risk of China having access to data collected by connected vehicles, “whether it be information about traffic patterns, critical infrastructure, or the lives of Americans.” China, he noted, “does not allow American-made EVs near their official buildings.” Hawley, for a much longer period, has been sounding the alarm about Chinese EVs, including those now being assembled and sold in Mexico (with easy access to the U.S.). Hawley’s proposal was a 127.5 percent net import tax on Chinese EVs, including those assembled in Mexico. So naturally, Brown had to go even further as election day draws near.
It is almost laughable that Brown – and Montana Senator Tester, also in a tough reelection battle – are the only Senate Democrats to join the retiring Joe Manchin in standing up to the President and his Cabinet on just this latest round of technology-forcing regulations and executive orders. There is no record of any prior concerns by either over the benefits to China of Biden Administration EV policies.
One has to wonder, though, whether this is merely electioneering. After herding in 10 million “newcomers,” President Biden and his Mexican counterpart are suddenly closing the U.S.-Mexico border, or so they say.
Will this newborn concern over Chinese hegemony last beyond November? Or will, should Democrats prevail, the U.S. continue to slide headlong toward a brave new world with the Chinese in the driver’s seat – just as they are in Ethiopia?
Once upon a time, linking climate change directly back to homosexuality was almost enough to get you sectioned. Remember 10 years ago, during the floods of 2014, when UKIP local councillor David Silvester was widely mocked after writing a letter to then-PM David Cameron, warning that the bad weather of the day was due to Dismal Dave’s acting “arrogantly against the Gospel” by planning to legalise gay marriage, thereby angering God Almighty and causing Him to unleash “storms, disease, pestilence and war” upon us all?
Once upon a time, linking climate change directly back to homosexuality was almost enough to get you sectioned. Remember 10 years ago, during the floods of 2014, when UKIP local councillor David Silvester was widely mocked after writing a letter to then-PM David Cameron, warning that the bad weather of the day was due to Dismal Dave’s acting “arrogantly against the Gospel” by planning to legalise gay marriage, thereby angering God Almighty and causing Him to unleash “storms, disease, pestilence and war” upon us all?
Today, the situation is kind of the reverse, and we are now exhorted to propitiate the angry climate-gods after all – otherwise they will punish those homosexuals who walk amongst us with terrible deluges and inundations of a new kind, as shown by the Daily Scepticreporting last week on a quite pathetic story in the Independent, headlined ‘How climate change is hitting vulnerable Indonesian trans sex workers’. As the DS wrote, “Street-walking in a Muslim majority country undoubtedly has perils”, but bad weather is not chief amongst them.
Rain of Terror
According to the Independent, the problem was that “the rainy season was lasting longer” and “winds were stronger”, causing clients to stay nice and dry at home and use prostitutes there instead. Even worse, 72% of transsexual escorts in the affected region “had increased expenses” when it rained – how much do umbrellas cost in Java these days? Therefore, it was argued, “climate change makes the vulnerable even more vulnerable”. But does it really? If you bother to read the whole report beyond its absolutely mental headline, you will see that most of the ladyboys involved actually enjoyed a, um, happy ending.
The particular transgender street-walkers interviewed for the piece by a brave journalist who sidled up to them after dark armed with a fistful of tourist dollars whilst whispering the words “it’s okay, I just want to talk”, all ended up in plum jobs once they had been forced off the pavements by an amazing extra 55mm of precipitation per annum – or, at least, plum jobs by comparison to the alternative employment prospect of selling their bodies to random all-comers on street-corners.
One became a singer with a transgender arts group, for whose associated theatre company he now runs a social media channel. Another got a place on a special entrepreneurship training programme aimed at “empowering transgender women”, following which he was able to set up his own small business, selling both home-made cakes and home-made smells re-labelled as ‘perfumes’.
So, if climate change really did force these former harlots off the streets (which it obviously didn’t – the last time heavy rain truly ended prostitution was during the happy, sin-cleansing days of Noah), then it forced them off the streets and into much better, safer, better-paid and more stable jobs – so surely the Independent’s headline should actually have been ‘How climate change is helping vulnerable Indonesian trans sex workers’, not “hitting” them?
Intersection 28
Why are the mainstream media suddenly desperate to begin spuriously linking climate change back to various ostensibly unrelated woke issues like transgenderism and prostitutes’ rights? It is all part of the modish neo-Marxist doctrine of ‘intersectionality’, which holds that, because capitalism, white privilege, patriarchy and homophobia all purportedly link together into one gigantic matrix of self-reinforcing oppression. So this fact (if ‘fact’ it really be) can likewise be combatted by highlighting and promoting the interlinked, intersectional potential nodes of minoritarian resistance against this very same nefarious power-matrix – blacks, Muslims, gays, feminists, rain-sodden transsexual Indonesian prostitutes, etc.
If it can be shown that climate change – caused by evil, white male-led Western capitalism – disproportionately affects, say, blind Taiwanese genderqueer midgets on wheels or something, then this finding can cynically be leveraged in order to place profound moral pressure upon our pathetic, liberal guilt-ridden, polluting institutions, industries and governments to systematically dismantle themselves wholesale.
In other words, instead of rebutting critics of Net Zero along rational, policy-based lines – which is often rather hard to do, as the whole policy of Net Zero is thoroughly irrational in the first place – professional Greentards can instead spare themselves the time and effort and just shout “Racist!”, “Whore-Hater!” or “Transphobe!” at their opponents thereby to shut them up immediately.
The logical conclusion of such trends culminates in the following recent online PR meme, spread jointly by the U.S. conservationist group Oregon Wild and someone named The Intersectional Environmentalist, which I promise is genuine and not a spoof starring Keith Lemon:
Less ‘Save the Trees’, more ‘Save the Trannies’. I didn’t realise that even some dryads were now ‘women with penises’ too these days.
This other twin meme, meanwhile, strongly implies transsexuals are an endangered hairy American forest-species, like Bigfoot:
Like the famous old 1960s Patterson-Gimlin Film footage of Bigfoot, however, I think that’s pretty obviously just a man dressed in a suit.
The Absolute Intersection of Insanity
Who is this meme-spreading ‘Intersectional Environmentalist’, with the emphasis upon those final three syllables? It is none other than a professional Third Sector complainer named Leah Thomas, a young American lady who grumbles that, back “in 2017, I was the only Black person [or even “black person”] in my graduating class to receive an environmental science degree”. Because of this sad racial isolation, says Leah, “at times, I felt the pressure to silence parts of my racial identity” (translation: not to spend every waking moment of my life shouting abuse at white people). Then, however, 2020 and the sudden environmental extinction of George Floyd came along, at which point silencing Ms. Thomas about the colour of her skin became absolutely impossible.
“In June 2020,” Leah told readers of Marie Claire magazine (it’s where the cool girls go to get all their latest peer-reviewed climate-data analysis), “as the Black Lives Matter movement reached global proportions, many of my environmental peers remained silent. I was frustrated. When I asked how it was possible that environmentalists and conservationists could advocate for the protection of even the smallest of species, but not Black lives or endangered people, I was met with confusion.”
I bet you were. What the hell does saving the narrow-ridged finless porpoise from extinction have to do with the death of George Floyd? Absolutely nothing, you may have reasonably thought: until, that is, the magic word ‘intersectionality’ is introduced into the mix.
Frustrated at her scientific colleagues’ inability to understand or appreciate her profoundly unscientific theories, Leah Thomas proudly “coined the term ‘Intersectional Environmentalism’” – hardly an ‘achievement’, one may have thought, it’s literally just putting the word ‘Intersectional’ in front of any given noun. Nonetheless, the term went viral online, and Leah somehow got a book deal out of it. Imaginatively, it is called The Intersectional Environmentalist, and has a twee little picture of a rainbow on the front, whether LGBT or rainfall-related in its nature, I do not know. Probably both – it’s about intersectionality, after all.
Leah even now has her own charitable non-profit propaganda-type organisation, which pushes the utterly fatuous line that biodiversity and political diversity go hand in hand: “The Earth and its eco-systems thrive on diversity and so does climate action.” Her own particular evolutionary niche in the current political eco-system of the West, I think, is best summed up by the single word ‘parasite’.
The basic modus operandi of Thomas’s creed – later taken up by the Independent as regards water-allergic Indonesian ladyboys – is as follows. Take any give piece of climate-related news. Then pick any given ‘vulnerable’ minority group. Now link the two, no matter how tenuously, and claim they will automatically be the worst affected – e.g. floods in Bangladesh will naturally impact local 35 stone comatose quadriplegics worst of all, because they can’t swim very well. Then, bung the key Newspeak word ‘Intersectional’ somewhere into your argument, and Bob’s your uncle – an easy front-page on Marie Claire/The Independent/Pravda/Asian Babes, a job well done!
Catrina and the Rising Waves
If you prefer to make the front page of Pink News, however, your chosen intersectional group of climate-euthanised pseudo-victims will, of course, have to be innately queer in nature, as ably demonstrated by the Scottish branch of Friends of the Earth. In a special essay called ‘Why Climate Change is an LGBTQ+ Issue’, written to mark annual Homo History Month, Catrina Randall, a queer-friendly voice for Friends of the Earth Scotland, reverently explained how:
Through climate justice, we recognise that the roots of climate change are tied up with the roots of multiple oppressions. Capitalism and colonialism fuel climate change, but are also a part of LGBTQ+ oppression… Anti-capitalism has long been important to many in the fight for queer liberation. We recognise that capitalism rewards conformity and punishes diversity [wholly unlike Communism, obviously]. It threatens diversity of gender and sexuality in the same way it threatens biodiversity in its quest for profit. Fighting capitalism and colonialism, both present day and the legacy, is key to fighting climate change, but it’s also a key part of queer liberation. Our fights are inherently linked.
If you ever wanted conclusive proof that, no matter how the whole field may have originally started out, the contemporary Green movement has today become little more than a pathetically obvious front for Marxism of one kind or another, then this is it. Biodiversity and sexual diversity are now revealed as one and the same thing – Save the Gay Pandas today!
From a far-Left perspective, explains Catrina, “when it comes to the fight against climate change, the LGBTQ+ community has so much to offer”, as “we have a history of fighting for survival” during things like the Stonewall Riots, so “we are trained for this fight”. Well, if gays have a long history of organising violent street-marches, so do other rival organisations like the National Front. Can we have Intersectional Fascism next? (Some may say we already do…)
According to Catrina, come the forthcoming Environmental Apocalypse, homosexuals will be particularly well-suited to saving lives and distributing succour on account of their alleged widespread past experience in “providing shelter in gay bars during natural disasters”. I’d rather take my chances outside in all the floodwaters, thanks. “We know when we come together we’re a force to be reckoned with,” Catrina ended her essay. We have been warned.
Oh, I Do Like To Be Gay Beside the Seaside!
Even proper full-blown academic journals have now drunk the Queer Intersectional Environmentalist Kool-Aid, as shown by a laughable piece which appeared in the Journal of Climate Change and Health in February, entitled ‘Climate Change-Related Disasters & the Health of LGBTQ+ Populations’.
With issues of biodiversity in mind, this report, quite genuinely, argued that, as gays are apparently now disproportionately a coastal-dwelling species, like crabs or starfish, who inhabit seaside or riverside towns and cities like Brighton and San Francisco in relatively greater numbers than boring old landlubber heterosexuals do, in a special form of microbiome known as “gayborhoods”, they are placed at innately higher risk of being drowned during global warming-triggered flood-events.
Because of such semi-aquatic dwelling-patterns, we are told, “approximately 4% of gay or lesbian people reported being forced to evacuate their home due to a natural disaster compared with 1.2% of heterosexual people.” Maybe UKIP’s David Silvester was right after all, and God really does send out floodwaters to punish deviants? He may also choose to punish them with wildfires, which likewise affect gay lungs far worse than straight ones, as “approximately 21% of LGBTQ+ adults live with asthma and/or emphysema compared with 14% of heterosexual adults”, for reasons entirely unexplained.
Furthermore, global warming will help spread tropical diseases, the authors warn, leaving HIV/AIDS-ridden gay people, with their suppressed immune systems, even more susceptible to infection from the next global wave of Um Bongo Fever than straight people will be. Furthermore, as supposedly proven during the COVID-19 pandemic, “LGBTQ+ Americans were more likely to work in jobs considered ‘essential’”, like being transgender street-prostitutes, meaning they would find it impossible to avoid being infected in a way their non-queer peers would not (no heterosexuals are known to be employed as binmen, delivery drivers, hospital workers, shopkeepers or policemen throughout all of the continental United States).
Even worse, once the floodwaters do strike, “emergency shelters are frequently ill-equipped to support LGBTQ+ people and are experienced as unwelcoming by them”. Shockingly, I would imagine some don’t even have transgender toilets, just chemical ones.
Now that we have been exposed to such profound Intersectional Environmentalist wisdom, I trust Daily Sceptic readers are all now fully aware of the immense and pressing need for every last one of us to cut down on our carbon emissions immediately, lest we accidentally trigger an irreversible Homosexual Mass Extinction Event sometime before 2050. We must all do our bit, and start transitioning away from fossil fuels this very instant, lest we push Graham Norton and Benjamin Butterworth into unwanted early graves. Any single unnecessary emission you create, and it is tantamount to strangling Matthew Parris with piano-wire.
With this distressing thought in mind, I have one final question for all those Intersectional Environmentalists out there, then: what are the CO2 emissions of the average Pride parade?
On episode 107 of The Climate Realism Show, we look yet again at the sad state of the U.S. Surface Temperature network, as host Anthony Watts has done yet another trip across the heartland of United States to get a fresh look at how these stations are setup.
On episode 107 of The Climate Realism Show, we look yet again at the sad state of the U.S. Surface Temperature network, as host Anthony Watts has done yet another trip across the heartland of United States to get a fresh look at how these stations are setup.
In 2009, and then again, as a follow-up, in 2022, detailed inspections with station location data and photographic evidence the problematic stations were done. Stations providing official climate data that were sited in locations where surrounding surfaces, structures, and equipment radiated stored heat or emitted heat directly biasing or driving the recorded temperatures higher than were recorded at stations in the same region, uncompromised by the well-known UHI (that is widely ignored by alarmists and official government agencies).
Of the sampling of hundreds of stations across the country Watts and his volunteer team documented in 2009, 89% were out of compliance for proper measurement practices. In 2022, with the second inspection, that number rose to 96%. The trip last week, while taking a smaller sample than the two previous efforts, approached 100% as out of compliance.
Join host Anthony Watts, and The Heartland Institute’s usual climate crew of H. Sterling Burnett and Linnea Lueken, to talk about the new findings and also the Crazy Climate News of the Week. Join us LIVE at 1 p.m. ET (12 p.m. CT) for the kind of climate realism you can’t find anywhere else, and join the chat to get your questions answered, too.
Dr. Jordan B. Peterson sits down with industry consultant, science activist, and past president of Greenpeace Canada (1971 to 1986), Dr. Patrick Moore. They discuss his time in Greenpeace, the historic timeline of global ice ages and climate change, the clear lies being peddled to promote alarmism, and how the woke left manipulates science (and scientists) to promote a falsely perceived and politically incentivized future catastrophe.
Dr. Jordan B. Peterson sits down with industry consultant, science activist, and past president of Greenpeace Canada (1971 to 1986), Dr. Patrick Moore. They discuss his time in Greenpeace, the historic timeline of global ice ages and climate change, the clear lies being peddled to promote alarmism, and how the woke left manipulates science (and scientists) to promote a falsely perceived and politically incentivized future catastrophe.
Dr. Patrick Moore has been a leader in the international environmental field for more than 45 years. He is a co-founder of Greenpeace and served for nine years as President of Greenpeace Canada and seven years as a Director of Greenpeace International. As the leader of many campaigns Dr. Moore was a driving force shaping policy and direction for 15 years while Greenpeace became the world’s largest environmental activist organization.
In recent years, Dr. Moore has been focused on the promotion of sustainability and consensus building among competing concerns. He founded and chaired the BC Carbon Project, a group that worked to develop a common understanding of climate change.
In 2021 Dr. Moore published “Fake Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom” exposing the fake news and fake science around 11 claims of disaster including climate change, coral reefs, polar bears, plastic, nuclear energy, and more.
The Heartland Institute
Jordan B Peterson
You must be logged in to post a comment.